“They’ve made my wife’s life an absolute misery,” he said, voice cracking, in what could be his last ever words in a UK courtroom.
A tall, lean figure, in a dark suit and tie, Prince Harry gave his evidence about what he sees as a lifetime of hounding by the media, which he claimed used unlawful means of gathering information.
His manner showed how personal this was to him, delivering terse and sometimes tense answers, about a series of stories that he said had “commercialised” his private life and those close to him.
It was something that he wanted the court to understand, that he’d been driven to “paranoia” by the constant attention surrounding him and his relationships.
At one point, the judge Mr Justice Nicklin intervened to tell Prince Harry that he needed to just answer the questions and not argue back.
Harry was painstakingly polite, but in the way people are when they’re actively trying not to shout back.
It is not clear whether his witness box had the same plastic signs that were on other desks with the reminder: “Please address the judge as my lord/my lady.”
Prince Harry painted a picture of a private life being surrounded by anxieties about leaks and intrusions, creating distrust and suspicion about those around him.
He batted away suggestions that some of the journalists who had written these stories were part of his friendship circle. When it was suggested one went to the same night clubs as him, he snapped back: “Good for her.”
Harry presented the court with the big picture view of the distress caused by being hunted down by the press, with accusations that it was a pursuit that had relied on illegal methods.
Opposing him was the patient, emotionless approach of Associated Newspapers’ barrister, Antony White, who offered an alternative explanation for the source of stories, making the case for how they were legitimately obtained.
While Prince Harry gave the emotion, the opposing barrister seemed to want to focus on the forensic detail. It was the broadsword versus the laser. Harry at times sounded more defensive than the defence.
As a spectacle, it wasn’t how a courtroom drama might be expected to appear.
Although Prince Harry was in the “witness box”, it really meant he was sitting in a kind of raised wooden area, behind a computer screen and an array of microphones.
The court wasn’t one of those historic rooms with lots of mahogany and Victorian furnishings. It was more like a university lecture room kitted out by Ikea, with rows of lawyers surrounded by boxes of folders and papers.
In fact the style of the courtroom seemed more modern than many of the newspaper stories being discussed. Because so much of this case seemed to revolve around stories written many years ago, in an entirely different era for the tabloid press.
‘ The preceding article may include information circulated by third parties ’
‘ Some details of this article were extracted from the following source www.bbc.co.uk ’
